Why West Berlin and could it have been avoided

some people think about a succsessfull invasion in 1943...

they do not understand that this is impossible because the allies lacked the ships, the landing boats, the total domination in the air or the troops

sure, the germans did first start in late 43 to make the "atlantic" wall...

but honestly, it was useless.

in 1943 the brits and americans are cannon fodder...
without air superiority - just remember, they need to attack in june - so no kursk :) that means the germans avoid this battle and pull all the planes and tanks to this combat area...

the allies - with no harbor - cannot break out - they are doomed.
they have not destroyed the infrastructure, have not bombed the german industry and the cities...

they have to fight the might of german air power - sure they will suffer in the east - but avoiding the attack improve the german situation a lot...

with the allies beaten and catching a lot equipment (and also have 200-300.000 prisoners extra) they can comeback and move more troops from the west to the east.

no good idea.. really not.
 
Then instead of an earlier invasion of Europe, something forces Stalin to slow down?

I'm no expert on the Eastern Front, but several offensives had so much territorial gains compared to what the Western Allies accomplished in the same time (Operation Bagration, Soviet occupation of Romania-Bulgaria) that I'd think some things going for the Germans would have decreased those advances. Of course, the big problem in that is getting Hitler to agree to the kind of resistance that would enable that: a flexible front, and strategic withdrawals to safer lines.
 
Then instead of an earlier invasion of Europe, something forces Stalin to slow down?

I'm no expert on the Eastern Front, but several offensives had so much territorial gains compared to what the Western Allies accomplished in the same time (Operation Bagration, Soviet occupation of Romania-Bulgaria) that I'd think some things going for the Germans would have decreased those advances. Of course, the big problem in that is getting Hitler to agree to the kind of resistance that would enable that: a flexible front, and strategic withdrawals to safer lines.

His insistence on staying in place was not always a bad idea, and on several occasions his listening to the generals could for instance turn the Battle of Moscow from defeat to Bagration-level catastrophe.
 
Then instead of an earlier invasion of Europe, something forces Stalin to slow down?

Another possibility is to have Stalin be a bit more concerned about manpower losses. The OTL Soviets were running pretty low on manpower reserves by the end of the war, so you could end up with a situation where the Soviets decide they need to be a bit more careful about avoiding casualties.
 
Another possibility is to have Stalin be a bit more concerned about manpower losses. The OTL Soviets were running pretty low on manpower reserves by the end of the war, so you could end up with a situation where the Soviets decide they need to be a bit more careful about avoiding casualties.

This was OTL and why the USSR came to prefer staggered offensives and maneuver with firepower compensating for firepower.
 
Top